|
Democracy Still In Chains By Nathaniel Cholom
Despite the apparent defeat of the infamous and unpopular third term agenda of President Obasanjo, Nigerian democrats should not lower their guard or leave things to chances. Having been defeated and humiliated, the pro-third term campaigners will still do everything to throw a spanner into the works of our democracy. Since all is grist that course to their will, they will stop at nothing in their attempt to make the transfer of power in 2007 less inspiring and transparent, thereby installing a puppet President who may owe no loyalty to Nigerians but to the man that put him into office.
The current leadership of the PDP was conceived and born into illegitimacy, and therefore, it has no commitment to genuine democratic order. Dictatorship and democracy are like oil and vinegar and unless authentic democratic order is restored into the PDP leadership structure, there is little hope that a credible electron can take place in 2007, let alone produce a widely acceptable President. Despite President Obasanjo’s Democracy Day broadcast in which he reiterated his commitment to that system of government, the discrepancy between his professed commitment to democracy and silent collaboration to destroy the precept of open and fair competition is too obvious to fool any discerning Nigerian.
A political party, which does not respect the basic tenets of freedom of choice in its internal democracy, cannot and should not be trusted to produce credible election in 2007. Is the restriction of presidential contest for 2007 to the Governors alone consistent with the claim of a political that boasts of its commitment to democracy? Why should the Governors select President Obasanjo’s successor among them? Why should other Nigerians be denied the right to contest the nation’s highest public office?
Why should any delegate attend the PDP convention when a Presidential candidate is already selected by the Governors, among themselves? Why should President Obasanjo and his hand-picked PDP leadership hijack the sovereignty of the delegates and illegally transfer their mandate to the Governors?
Democracy is not the private property of the President and his pack of self-imposed leaders in the PDP. Restricting the rights of other Nigerians to contest the Presidency is no less a threat to democracy than the defeated third term agenda. Obviously therefore, Nigerians have every reason for genuine fears that the battle is not yet over, despite the seeming fiasco that hit the third term agenda. A Presidential candidate endorsed by Gen. Obasanjo may not necessarily be acceptable to Nigerians. President Obasanjo and his amalgam of sycophants are determined to exploit every trick to distort our democracy through manipulation.
The greatest fear, however, is the desperate extent the President’s men can go to manipulate INEC. The credibility of the electoral agency is as vital to the survival of democracy as free and fair contest. As the late Russian dictator Josef Stalin argued, “those who cast the votes decide nothing but those who count the votes decide everything.” Therefore, given the unscrupulous extent the non-elected PDP leaders can go, is INEC free of their manipulation? We had instances where INEC frustrated recall processes against politicians in the good books of the President or his handpicked PDP leadership. Because of the nature and character of the men currently holding sway over the PDP, Nigerians have lost any confidence that Col. Ahmadu Ali is committed to any credible election in 2007.
Already, the INEC election timetable for 2007 has heightened public suspicion that the pseudo-democrats in PDP will not care to create chaos so as to achieve a fertile ground for executing their unfinished agenda. With the constitution conferring certain emergency powers on the President in circumstances of confusion, his agents are ready to exploit every loophole to achieve their designs. Although the INEC Chairman, Professor Maurice Iwu, has repeatedly assured the nation of his commitment to democracy and credible elections, Nigerians are worried still whether he will have the courage of conviction to assert himself against the manipulation of those who believe their selfish ambitions supersede the country’s interest. His controversial 2007 election timetable is already lending credence to the fear of such manipulation.
Nigerians are becoming increasingly less enthusiastic about 2007 because of the obvious fear that President Obasanjo and his pack of non-elected PDP leaders are not ready to produce credible elections. As they continue to pay lip service to democracy, it is doubtful if INEC will be able to resist the pressures of those who wouldn’t mind to twist democracy to achieve their objectives. The credibility of the 2007 elections will determine the survival of our democracy. If Nigerians could resist tenure elongation with heart and might, they will oppose the manipulation of the 2007 elections with the same moral passion.
However, one of the most worrying aspects of the current attempts to manipulate the 2007 elections has to do with the plan to scheme out certain Nigerians from seeking the mandate of Nigerians. The fallacious theory recently thrown up by Brigadier David Mark (rtd) in which he asserts that only men with military background can guarantee the success of our democracy. But the Benue State Senator seems to suffer short memories. If a military background is a prerequisite for the success of democracy, why has our democracy been in total mess since Col. Ahmadu Ali was imposed as the National Chairman of the PDP.
Isn’t President Obasanjo not behaving like a bull in a china shop of our democracy? Didn’t former President Babangida almost cause a civil war in 1993 after making a hash of our democratic transition programme in June of that year? If military background is the ingredient for democracy success, Nigerians would not have been experiencing despotism today under the guise of democracy. Does lack of military background reduce a citizen’s qualification to contest the Presidency? Did former President Bill Clinton of the United States have a military background to achieve the unprecedented record of economic and social prosperity be had brought to the Americans? Brigadier David Mark’s theory is part of the diversion to prevent Nigerians from electing credible and competent Nigerians in their own right, regardless of whether they had a military background or not. President Obasanjo was nominated through a consensus in 1999; there is no reason therefore, why he must tacitly encourage the constriction of the political space for free and open contest for all PDP aspirants. After the moral damage he has inflicted on his credibility in the aftermath of the failed third term agenda, President Obasanjo can ill afford to destroy his place in history by leaving a legacy of crisis-ridden succession.
Restricting the choice of Nigerians to the Governors in the search for Obasanjo’s success flies in the face of open, fair and transparent democratic contest. The so-called reconciliation initiative of the PDP will come to naught if the leadership of the party refuses to purge itself of undemocratic tendencies. Freedom of choice is the heart of democracy and once it is destroyed it, democracy is fatally wounded.
The only way the PDP can avert inevitable disintegration is to restore genuine democratic culture and recognize the rights of all party members to vie for the Presidency. And as long as the party remains tied to the apron strings of President Obasanjo, who has undisguised disdain for open democratic process, the road to reconciliation will remain bumpy and arduous. Sincerity is the only factor that can restore President’s reputation as a neutral figure in the process of choosing his successor. The fate of the PDP will depend largely on how Gen. Obasanjo and his clique on the party hierarchy behaves in the days, weeks and months leading up to the 2007 Presidential election.
NATHANIEL CHOLOMJos, Plateau State.
|